Exactly, why hasn't it been done yet? We have to do it ourselves. There's some people over on youtube posting tests and experimentation and I don't think they're all scammers wanting you to buy their BS mason jars producing HHO. Some of these guys are serious electronic hobbyists. Check out a guy named zerofossilfuel. His work is inspirational.

 

Because nobody wants worse fuel economy, which is what the result would be.


Torben

__________________
Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.

 

If real testing has already been done and the concept has been debunked, then the debunkers would already be out their with their own scientific information and numbers. As for the naysayers with just opinions, I guess they're just as bad as me. No info, no numbers, no testing as of yet. Just hypothesi. Don't get me wrong, when I start testing I will post on a new thread and I may start debunking if it turns out to be BS. I'm done on this thread now...

 

That's almost a good argument, except it ignores the fact that current understandings of physics and math side with the so-called "naysayers". Those who claim that these gains can be made are in fact claiming that modern physics may be wrong. They may well be right; we don't know everything. However, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and there has been none of that put forward. The naysayers' experiments have already been done, and those experiments are the ones upon which the Laws of Thermodynamics are founded.

It takes a lot of proof to overturn well-established rules. I hope you do your tests, and while I do not believe that you will find that the idea works, it would be nice to see physics turned on its ear--that's how the greatest advances in our understanding of the universe have been made. The problem here is that there is no great mystery to the maths involved, and for the proposed system to work, the Laws of Thermodynamics must first be proven wrong. Despite mighty efforts over the years, that has yet to happen.


Torben

__________________
Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.

 

This video just came up on Instructables.com, kind of made me wonder about this thread...

http://www.instructables.com/id/Wate...-volt-battery/

Not really detailed, and considering some of the hoax videos I've seen, hard to tell if this is real. It makes the Browns gas, using a 9 volt battery, which I wouldn't think it would last long enough to produce much gas. When the guy flipped the switch, sort of a fog started to form, few seconds later he opened a valve and lit it up. Not a huge explosive flame, like in chemistry class electrolysis.

Even as a 'naysayer', must admit to being a little impressed. Maybe a quart container, a 9 volt battery, and only a few seconds before a burnable amount of gas is produced. I can see how so many people get hooked on this crap...

 

He never picked it up and only twisted the bottle. I think a hose or more electricity is coming from the bottom. The 9v battery isn't in circuit.

Just a guess kv

Edit: Did you ever HV that rat ?

__________________
Truthiness Monkeys : Obedience, Ignorance, Fear.

 

I just remember the discussion a couple of pages back about the AA batteries and converting a whole ocean, when I saw this video. Seemed to fit pretty well with those arguments.

Rats, never got even one on any of the homemade gadgets. Did get zapped changing batteries on one of the traps I bought. Unpleasant, but didn't feel life threatening. Fortunately just through my hand.

 

That video has to be fake. I see no Bubbles being produced at the bottom of the jar where his plates are and I have never see a real working HHO system bubble in that way his did. Also I have heard that an arrester for a common torch is to slow to suppers a back fire from HHO.
Aslo in the video (the begging) it says "After 678 Differnts Endehavors"
I have no idea what a "endehavors" is

 

agreed why is every other thread on this section about making hydrogen in-car to run the car more efficiently

__________________
I AM the exeption that disproves the rule in many ways but the rules still apply (unfortunately)

my site:www.simons-photography.com
http://rushdenrotaract.org.uk

 

Because the price at the pump keeps rising, and will pretty much continue to do so. Even a slight improvement can be measured in dollars. I believe that the claims are unrealistic, but it does produce some burnable fuel, so I would completely write it off as useless. What is useless, is believe you can just hook up a couple of wires and shove a tube into the carberator, and you start saving money. Most cars on the road have computers controlling fuel mixture, doesn't know what to do with the new addition. Maybe if somebody comes up with a new engine to take advantage...

Don't for get the Global Warming crowd either. I'm mean we have to do something, can we really afford to not even try? (complete crap)

I do agree that there should be some way to separate the fringe topics, from the proven. Perhaps a 'experimental' Alternative Energy forum for the Joe-Cells and Stearon machines, leave this one to stuff already in use like wind, solar, and hydro.

 

One aspect often forgotten by advocates of HHO is its (namely hydrogen's) deleterious effects on the environment. It seems most of the advocates focus on what happens when one burns hydrogen and gets only water. Water is good is all that is considered, but that doesn't mean hydrogen itself is a non-pollutant. By analogy, consider ordinary table salt (NaCl), which is essential for life, but chlorine gas itself is a poison.

In fact research reported from Stanford shows that hydrogen increases the effects of greenhouse gases and can lead to destruction of ozone in the upper atmosphere. Thus, the hydrogen you are producing may be as bad for the environment as outlawed aerosol propellants and greenhouse gases.

The quotation given above contains multiple excerpts from that one source. NB: The references to ozone may seem self-contradictory. The authors are studying the effects in the stratosphere and troposphere.

So, those of you making hydrogen need to carefully consider how much you are polluting the atmosphere, increasing global warming, and contributing to increased cancer rates by increasing the ozone hole.

John

 

here are the simple facts....

FACT: we are using oil from the earth that took millions of years to produce.

FACT: it will not be replaced once used so we will expend all the earths oil eventually. (what will oil companies sell when the oil reserves end ?)
* oil insurance? (which insurance is a legalized scam).

FACT: Global warming is a real threat, and will be experienced in our lifetime.

FACT: Hydrogen or HHO makes the engine run cooler, cleaner more efficent.

FACT: I.C.E (internal combustion engine) run dirty on carbon based fuels, diesel and gasoline. * look up ethanol, most gas is sold with 10 % so out out the 9/10ths of a gallon you pay for ... your only getting 7.73% of actual gasoline.
hydrogen can increase the burn rate of ethanol and gas so there is less heat and less loss of usable power eliminating the use of cat converters.

FACT: water has an electrical resonance of the oxygen and hydrogen electrons, if you cause a breakdown of the covalent bonded electrons they will separate or release the their shared magnetic attraction because the shared electrons are replaced by induced electrons from electrolysis. simple example is three magnets, the opposite poles attract two of the three but as soon as you add a third it changes the magnetic "hold" and attraction of opposite poles and the magnets break apart , so if you add electrons to the H2o molecule at the breakdown freq. it will separate.

TRUTH: hydrogen is the most abundance renewable resource in the universe, our sun uses it as its "MAIN" fuel and in that process it causes nuclear reactions or fission which regenerates a portion of the energy that is lost as heat.

what we should be researching is a way to chemicaly break down water into its atomic parts and burn the hho as fuel, and then the byproduct is H20 all over again.

my two cents.

 

see this thread
http://www.electro-tech-online.com/a...tml#post328524 ( page 6 and after, the pages before it are interesting but I think you'll see why i said page 6 onwards

 

What the .............. I've never seen this before.

Edit: I think I'm in the Matrix. kv

__________________
Truthiness Monkeys : Obedience, Ignorance, Fear.

 

Anyone knows that…

Yes we consume oil and it will be depleted if we continue to use it. Thank you for clarifying. Likewise if I eat all the cereal in my cereal box it will be empty...

Prove it. You are one side of the camp, there is a whole other side that disproves it as well.

Prove it. Earlier I believe I read that HHO burns hotter so water would have to be injected to cool it down… Now why such conflicting info from the HHO camp?

“Up to 10%”, means the fuel in the tank could have “up to 10%” ethanol, so the remaining 90% must be from oil from the ground. Correct? Not sure where you got your 7.73%.

Prove that hydrogen can increase the burn rate. Changing the burn rate reduces the heat? Less heat means less expansion of gas, which means lower cylinder pressures, which means less power output. The catalytic converter used platinum and other elements to reduce CO, VOC and nitrogen oxide emissions… Burning fuel with hydrogen won’t reduce these emissions, since there is still fuel being burned.

“Water has an electrical resonance of the oxygen and hydrogen electrons” Please explain what the electrical resonance is…along with your education and experience (being on an HHO forum doesn’t count…sorry).

Yes but the sun doesn’t need to use energy to split water molecules to burn it…